ArticlePloS one2014
A low complexity rapid molecular method for detection of Clostridium difficile in stool.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) and Algorithms Including NAATs for the Diagnosis ofClinical microbiology reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Loop mediated isothermal amplification of Clostridioides difficile isolates in gastrointestinal patients.AMB Express · 2022Article
- Clostridioides difficile laboratory diagnostic techniques: a comparative approach of rapid and molecular methods.Archives of microbiology · 2021Article
- Nucleic acid sample preparation from whole blood in a paper microfluidic device using isotachophoresis.Journal of chromatography. B, Analytical technologies in the biomedical and life sciences · 2021Article
- Advances in Directly Amplifying Nucleic Acids from Complex Samples.Biosensors · 2019Review
- Rapid detection of Salmonella in food and feed by coupling loop-mediated isothermal amplification with bioluminescent assay in real-time.BMC microbiology · 2016Article
- A prospective study of two isothermal amplification assays compared with real-time PCR, CCNA and toxigenic culture for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.BMC microbiology · 2016Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of loop-mediated isothermal amplification in detection of Clostridium difficile in stool samples: a meta-analysis.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2015Review
- Low-Density TaqMan® Array Cards for the Detection of Pathogens.Methods in microbiology · 2015Article
- Molecular isothermal techniques for combating infectious diseases: towards low-cost point-of-care diagnostics.Expert review of molecular diagnostics · 2014Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Here we describe a method for the detection of Clostridium difficile from stool using a novel low-complexity and rapid extraction process called Heat Elution (HE). The HE method is two-step and takes just 10 minutes, no specialist instruments are required and there is minimal hands-on time. A test method using HE was developed in conjunction with Loop-mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP) combined with the real-time bioluminescent reporter system known as BART targeting the toxin B gene (tcdB). The HE-LAMP-BART method was evaluated in a pilot study on clinical fecal samples (tcdB(+), n = 111; tcdB(-), n= 107). The HE-LAMP-BART method showed 95.5% sensitivity and 100% specificity against a gold standard reference method using cytotoxigenic culture and also a silica-based robotic extraction followed by tcdB PCR to control for storage. From sample to result, the HE-LAMP-BART method typically took 50 minutes, whereas the PCR method took >2.5 hours. In a further study (tcdB(+), n = 47; tcdB(-), n= 28) HE-LAMP-BART was compared to an alternative commercially available LAMP-based method, Illumigene (Meridian Bioscience, OH), and yielded 87.2% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the HE-LAMP-BART method compared to 76.6% and 100%, respectively, for Illumigene against the reference method. A subset of 27 samples (tcdB(+), n = 25; tcdB(-), n= 2) were further compared between HE-LAMP-BART, Illumigene, GeneXpert (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA) and RIDA®QUICK C. difficile Toxin A/B lateral flow rapid test (R-Biopharm, Darmstadt, Germany) resulting in sensitivities of HE-LAMP-BART 92%, Illumigene 72% GeneXpert 96% and RIDAQuick 76% against the reference method. The HE-LAMP-BART method offers the advantages of molecular based approaches without the cost and complexity usually associated with molecular tests. Further, the rapid time-to-result and simple protocol means the method can be applied away from the centralized laboratory settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.